I'd be happy if Apple gets even the minimum in royalty fees. At least Google and Android won't get away completely. Every little bit of interference will help to slow Android's momentum down. Eventually Android OS will be modified enough where they won't have to pay Apple anything and Apple will get what it was originally after.

The nice thing about not understanding the full implications and consequences of patent wars like this one is you get to view it all like a round of fantasy football.

It's only when you start working and actually paying the bills you realize there's no such thing as a free lunch.

The 2.25% was for Motorola's group of patents pledged to the 3G standard. Otherwise it would make no sense since they could come after Apple for another 2.25% for another patent in the standards-pledged group later, then another, then another. . .

A few days ago I challenged your claim that Motorola and Google announced they wanted 2.25% for each individual patent in the standards pool. If there were 100 that would mean they wanted 225%, plainly ridiculous. I said at that time they had not made any such statement, so you still have the opportunity to prove me wrong.

If you read Florean Mueller motorola wants to do exactly that, 2.25% for each FRAND patent as a maximum value, Mueller states that at that rate it would become impossible to make a device profitable.
Motorola is currently suing for 1 FRAND Patent that it has won an injunction on in Germany and wants 2.25 % of end product sales for that patent. If they win with this one they could sue again and again over different patents.

Thats why motorola and google are extortionists and this would be terrible for the entire industry as a whole if it set this as a precedence.

There is nothing stopping motorola from suing over different FRAND patents again and again if they want too. Nothing they have said in public says that they won't. On the contrary they say that it is up to them if they sue over another patent.

Here is a good link on how motorola views FRAND patents with an analogy compared to a bank robbery that it takes only one bullet to kill:

If true, the number is similar to what Motorola has sought in its own proposed settlement with Apple. Motorola revealed in court filings in February that it has asked for 2.25 percent of Apple's sales of wireless devices in exchange for a patent license covering its standard-essential intellectual property.

This is bad journalism when you use the word 'similar' without explaining what a 'standard-essential' patent is and why it comes with a FRAND licensing requirement.

It's the same kind of false equivalence that journalists display when they talk about the public debate over global warming and evolution.

If you read Florean Mueller motorola wants to do exactly that, 2.25% for each FRAND patent as a maximum value, Mueller states that at that rate it would become impossible to make a device profitable.

No sir. Florian Mueller does not think Motorola wants 2.25% for a single patent. He says quote:
"The answer is: 2.25%. I assume this relates to Apple's sales and to all of MMI's standard-essential patents, though the context is only one patent (the one over which Motorola has already forced Apple, temporarily, to remove certain products from its German online store. Assuming in Motorola's favor that this was a license to all standard-essential wireless patents, the amount still appears excessive to me given how many companies hold patents on such standards and what royalty rate this would lead to in the aggregate."

You've simply misunderstood what he's written if you believe he was of the opinion Motorola wanted to apply the 2.25% to each and every individual patent contributed to the pool. The "aggregate" he refers to is the group of companies that contribute to a standard, not the aggregate number of patents contributed by a single company.

No sir. Florian Mueller does not think Motorola wants 2.25% for a single patent. He says quote:
"The answer is: 2.25%. I assume this relates to Apple's sales and to all of MMI's standard-essential patents, though the context is only one patent (the one over which Motorola has already forced Apple, temporarily, to remove certain products from its German online store. Assuming in Motorola's favor that this was a license to all standard-essential wireless patents, the amount still appears excessive to me given how many companies hold patents on such standards and what royalty rate this would lead to in the aggregate."

You've simply misunderstood what he's written if you believe he was of the opinion Motorola wanted to apply the 2.25% to each and every individual patent contributed to the pool. The "aggregate" he refers to is the group of companies that contribute to a standard, not the aggregate number of patents contributed by a single company.

How sad. A classic example of when blind, emotional loyalty a brand clouds reading comprehension skills. I find it kind of sad that you have to educate people on how to properly read and parse paragraphs especially when these articles were already to be understandable for the masses.

In fact in that last post google specifically states to the standards committee in the letter that is in the article the 2.25% end product sales royalty they consider to be "fair". lol

If 2.25% of the device selling price is unfair, what would you call Qualcomm's 3.25% they want of the total device sale (not a chipset) for the patents they contributed to the 4G/LTE standard. Then add in what Nokia and partner want, 2.3%, plus another 2% for Lucent/Alcatel, 2.25% for Motolola and yet another 1.5% each for Ericsson and Huawei. Oh and ZTE wants their cut too, another 1%. The total? 13.8% of the finished end-user device selling price. And that's an improvement over standards royalty rates from a couple years prior. Qualcomm wanted 5% all for themselves at the height of the 3G rollout. Yes, 5% of the device selling price, not a chipset.

Or perhaps this is fair.
Last year Nokia settled with Apple on the suit they brought against them for several FRAND-pledged patents, with Apple paying on-going royalties to Nokia on every iPhone sold. Yet that settlement didn't keep Nokia and their partner Microsoft thru MOSAID from going after Apple again last week with a different set of standards-essential patents. I suppose since they were successful asserting FRAND patents against Apple the first time they might as well try again for the same result. IMO this makes Motorola look like one of the good guys in comparison.

The problem is that too many people trusted the little bit that FOSSPatents had to say about what was fair, implying that basing the royalty off a selling price was highly unusual when it's in fact pretty darn common with phones. Very few bothered with checking the facts for themselves. Had they done so they would also have found that Motorola's royalty rate has been consistent for quite a long while and in line with the rates of other's contributing to standards, regardless what Florian Mueller was attempting to spin. I'm convinced he already knew all the facts I've posted and has his own reasons for trying to convince readers of something that isn't. That by no means indicates I agree with everything Motorola has done, especially with FRAND-pledged IP and atempting to get sales injunctions. That's not in keeping with the intent of standards IMHO.

Again the 2.25% applies to a license to the entire package of patents that Motorola pledged to that standard afaik. Motorola was showing two specific ones as being infringed by Microsoft, but the 2.25% would buy them the licensing to any Moto patents pledged for that particular standard. Are there only two that Motorola contributed? I don't know. If you have some source showing there were only those two contributed, then a simple link to the evidence is plenty to convince me.

No. Moto's legal team was directly quoted as that was per patent and they went on to say that was because "It only takes one bullet to kill". In a filed court document!.

Anyway, I've seen claims that even Apple may be paying Nokia more than $10 per iPhone sold just for the license to the standards patents they they settled with Nokia last year. Apparently 5% of the handset sales price, give-or-take, is common in the industry. I found evidence the other day that handset manufacturers that aren't willing to cross-license may be paying upwards of 13% for a license to 4G/LTE standards.

Apple's royalty payment to Nokia is not just for standards patents but also for non-standards patents.

No. Moto's legal team was directly quoted as that was per patent and they went on to say that was because "It only takes one bullet to kill". In a filed court document!.

No matter how many times that's claimed, it's still wrong. Show me proof that Motorola or Google says they want 2.25% for each individual patent in a standard and you get to be the one that proves me wrong. I've asked others several times and so far no results.

I think this $5-$15 asked for by Apple could be after cross licensing all of the other party patents. So this could be actual cash flowing to Apple. And Apple doesn't have to pay them anything more for their patents. If that's the case, it is not so cheap anymore! But not sure if this will hold - could just be the opening gambit.

Secondly, Apple has probably realized that Android is failing under its own issues. Like fragmentation, malware, etc. And Apple probably wants to just increase the pressure a little bit, so Android momentum is halted.

There isn't much point in attempting to kill Android - because then Android will be replaced by Windows phone 8. From Apple's perspective it would just be a philosophical victory. Apple can't go after MS - because of various cross licensing etc.

In fact, Apple's settlement with Nokia is by interesting. It came about after Nokia gave up on Symbian and adopted Windows Phone. When Nokia did that, Apple had nothing to fight for anymore. Quite obviously a battle between MS and Apple for these patents would be way too messy and would only serve to implode both companies. Their willingness to cross license with Nokia was only symbolic - as Nokia did not really need Apple's licenses anyway. They would be protected by MS for using Windows. Their current cross licensing offers are more the real deal.

I guess Apple is also doing this to eliminate Android and make Windows Phone the number 2. That way Apple has significant momentum advantage, installed base, etc.

I think this $5-$15 asked for by Apple could be after cross licensing all of the other party patents. So this could be actual cash flowing to Apple. And Apple doesn't have to pay them anything more for their patents. If that's the case, it is not so cheap anymore! But not sure if this will hold - could just be the opening gambit.

At best Apple would recieve 5 dollars per phone after any cross licensing, but odds are they'd receive nothing from Samsung or Motorola - just the cross licensing of patents.

So far Apple's lawsuits have been fruitless - the only injunctions they've been granted were on patents that were worked around anyway. And the other looming threat (Oracle) is about to be dismissed altogether.

Apple probably realizes their position in the marketplace isn't so bad (it's very good actually), and that litigation is not needed. It would only be a risk, for minimal (or no) gain.

Quote:

Originally Posted by macarena

Secondly, Apple has probably realized that Android is failing under its own issues. Like fragmentation, malware, etc. And Apple probably wants to just increase the pressure a little bit, so Android momentum is halted.

Some Android manufacturers are failing (Sony, Motorola, LG) because of competition, while others are thriving (Samsung, HTC), and yet more are up and coming (Huawei, Lenovo, Asus). Android as a platform is in good condition. Issues like fragmentation and malware are non issues, just sensationalized (for instance, Android is inherently a very safe platform, the only way malware can get onto a phone is for the user to consciously download and install a malicious app through their own stupidity).

Quote:

Originally Posted by macarena

There isn't much point in attempting to kill Android - because then Android will be replaced by Windows phone 8. From Apple's perspective it would just be a philosophical victory. Apple can't go after MS - because of various cross licensing etc.

Not to mention Bada, WebOS, Meego, Tizen, the latter 3 are even open source too.

Quote:

Originally Posted by macarena

I guess Apple is also doing this to eliminate Android and make Windows Phone the number 2. That way Apple has significant momentum advantage, installed base, etc.

Cross licensing with Android manufacturers won't eliminate Android, it will preserve the status quo, and eliminate the looming threat that hangs over Android. Then it's up to the manufacturers to compete in the market.

I think this $5-$15 asked for by Apple could be after cross licensing all of the other party patents. So this could be actual cash flowing to Apple. And Apple doesn't have to pay them anything more for their patents. If that's the case, it is not so cheap anymore! But not sure if this will hold - could just be the opening gambit.

Nowhere in the article does it indicate such a thing. You're just speculating in favor of Apple, most likely because you own AAPL. I mean there's literally no basis for suggesting that this is post other negotiation.

You keep saying that, but at the time, it was clear that they were asking for 2.25% per patent - and Google affirmed that number.

I've already challenged you twice before to prove that Google and/or Motorola said they want 2.25% for each patent they contributed to a standard. You've already demonstrated you don't have evidence showing you're correct.

I guess it still doesn't prevent you from continuing to spread a half-truth tho. Maybe if you repeat it often enough it will become one of those "everyone knows" facts?

No matter how many times that's claimed, it's still wrong. Show me proof that Motorola or Google says they want 2.25% for each individual patent in a standard and you get to be the one that proves me wrong. I've asked others several times and so far no results.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gatorguy

I've already challenged you twice before to prove that Google and/or Motorola said they want 2.25% for each patent they contributed to a standard. You've already demonstrated you don't have evidence showing you're correct.

I guess it still doesn't prevent you from continuing to spread a half-truth tho. Maybe if you repeat it often enough it will become one of those "everyone knows" facts?

And several time I have responded with the Moto filings. I cannot downl;oad German court docs, so I have to take the word of someone who can:

Quote:

Motorola likens its enforcement of FRAND patents to bank robbery: 'it only takes one bullet to kill'
Patent litigation is full of surprises, but what I learned this afternoon is beyond belief. Based on what was said in open court today in Mannheim, Germany, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Motorola Mobility submitted an expert report on patent royalties according to which a single patent that is essential to an industry standard is pretty much as valuable as a large number of patents on the same standard because, in the context of a bank robbery, "it only takes one bullet to kill", reducing the importance of any additional bullets in the same gun.

Go ahead and quibble on language that does not meet your overly narrow definition simply because it was uttered before you made up your very narrow question terms, but there is no way for a reasonable person to come to any conclusion other than Moto is claiming a single patent at 2.25%. There are anecdotal reports of the Moto lead lawyer saying after this case is finished they will sue on the next one for 2.25% because the gun will have been reloaded.

Simply on principle, Apple should be demanding at least $100/per handset. Hell, $200. Shut em out as far as I'm concerned. Let them go back to their blackberry clone before Schmidt caught wind of what Apple did.

And should Motorola and Samsung demand the same in return for use of their patented tech?

Go ahead and quibble on language that does not meet your overly narrow definition simply because it was uttered before you made up your very narrow question terms, but there is no way for a reasonable person to come to any conclusion other than Moto is claiming a single patent at 2.25%. There are anecdotal reports of the Moto lead lawyer saying after this case is finished they will sue on the next one for 2.25% because the gun will have been reloaded.

Far from "quibbling" nowhere does that say that Motorola wants 2.25% of the device selling price for each patent they contribute to a pool. You apparently are reading that for what you want to see rather than what it says. The entire comment has to do with a single patent being capable of a kill. That's absolutely true. Also true is there's more than one patent in the pool.

Your source that supposedly "proves" Motorola wants 2.25% per patent doesn't even believe that himself. Florian Mueller/FOSSPatents actually thinks the 2.25% royalty "relates to Apple's sales and to all of MMI's standard-essential patents, though the context is only one patent (the one over which Motorola has already forced Apple, temporarily, to remove certain products from its German online store. Assuming in Motorola's favor that this was a license to all standard-essential wireless patents, the amount still appears excessive to me given how many companies hold patents on such standards and what royalty rate this would lead to in the aggregate."

You're going to have to look harder if you're trying to prove me wrong. My suggestion is don't bother because they've never stated that, nor has Google. Even finding an instance where the 2.25% applies to a set of two patents (the case you mentioned), doesn't mean that every two patents in every standard Motorola contributes to gets hit with another 2.25%. I have no doubt at all that you already figured that out.

I defend Android in this board because that is what most of you people like to verbally attack.

Hatred is a strong word.

I'd say I offer constructive criticism.

What if I told you that I'm a shareholder of APPL?

Criticisms are what makes a company better.

Many people criticized Apple for not having a notification drop down menu on iOS.

Guess what?

Apple listened and was included.

Yes, I'm still THAT guy. I dont own ANY smartphone. My trusty Nokia 6500 is still kicking strong. True story.

Nokia is still my favorite phone manufacture. I don't know what it is, maybe it's because they were the true inventor of the smart phone with their Communicator series. I owned every single model even when they had the 9500 and 9300 at the same time. I finally broke down and bought a iPhone 4 last year which was my first Apple phone, it was nice and I didn't have many complaints but It wasn't a Nokia. So when Nokia released their new 800 series I bought one giving the iPhone to my daughter, he he now she's in heaven so it all worked out.

Great phone the Nokia 800, however what I should have gotten was the N9. So when I found one on eBay for a great price, even a white one at that, I bought one and yesterday it arrived. Man I was idiot, I can't believe I waited this long. Best phone ever, period. The OS is fantastic, design is just WOW, 64 GB, if you guys find one on eBay for a good price you owe it to your self to pick one up. Guarantee you'll love it, if you don't send me a message and I'll buy it off of you. Oh man the N9 is an amazing phone, I can talk about it forever. Nokia, please don't stop making Meego phones.

Thank goodness Samsung has taken over by adding Meego to their Bada line. Can't wait to see what they have for us because that OS is so much better then, iOS, Android and WIndows Mobile 7.5.

When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.

How would support of something else non-Android relate to hating Apple?

I support Windows Phone 7 and want it to get better. It's a great alternative. Does that mean I hate Apple?

Ah, "you people". I see.

It's a really nice business mobile OS isn't it. I have a Nokia 800 as my personal phone. The office apps are the best and Skydrive, wow! The email program is actually better then the Gmail client for Android which I thought wasn't possible. I also really like how good Facebook is implemented on the phone, not only is the Facebook app the best out of every platform but I love the way my messages show up looking like a SMS, very clever.

I see WP7 or 8 becoming a real competitor to iOS in the near future.

When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.

Oh man I just realized I have serious gadget fetish problem. I can't help it though, we only have one car, I don't go shopping all the time for clothes and I guess we live pretty modestly compared to others. Both my husband and I also make really decent money. So I guess my only weakness is tech. I do sell the stuff I buy so there is some return. In fact I figured out how to have a new laptop every 6 months for the same price of owning one laptop for 4 years. It's called saving you boxes, always buy the extended warranty and keep very good care of your devices. I always sell my stuff for very little off the original price that I bought them at.

When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.